- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix
Correct. She can ignore section 2.4-2.6 in the form. This is for cases where the applicant has no PR Confirmation (as this is optional) or has it for less than 1 year (but after 6 years of residence).damianpfister wrote:As this required obtaining 5 years worth of "evidence of me exercising my treaty rights", would I be correct in saying that after 12 months (Sep 2013) my wife could apply for BC based purely on the permanent residence stamp in her passport (along with other requirements) and not need to again provide 5 years of evidence as in EEA4?
she can always use the UK immigration route for British citizens. You might also be able to use the EEA route but this is less clear how the HO would react. Recent changes in the EEA regulations are preventing British citizens for using the EEA route (with some exception) but I don't think that would stand in our case. You are not British and your wife becoming British doesn't change her status of a family member of a Swiss national.Once she has obtained BC will she no longer be entitled to bring family into the UK (parents) as she is no longer considered "non-EEA/Swiss family member of an EEA/Swiss National"?
I presume you understand that exercise rights as a PR basically means you don't need to do anything apart from not leaving the UK for more than 2 consecutive years.I don't plan on obtaining BC so will simply continue exercising my right to permanent residence in the UK as a Swiss National (I got my confirmation 2 months back after submitting EEA3).
I know someone who struggles with this decision, and I also noticed that something related popped up in a different thread recently. All things considered: If someone qualifies for BC, but plans to bring non-EEA family members into the UK, would the UK immigration route be a better choice or the EEA2/4-route? In other words, if someone would want to bring his/her future spouse (for example) to the UK at a later point, would taking up BC be a mistake?Jambo wrote:she can always use the UK immigration route for British citizens
I would agree that for EEA nationals becoming British is less attractive now (and in any case this, as you know, is more an emotional decision than anything else). For Family members of EEA national, then BC has its advantages and surely in the OP case, it is not a clear cut that the EEA route will be closed.Gyfrinachgar wrote:If someone qualifies for BC, but plans to bring non-EEA family members into the UK, would the UK immigration route be a better choice or the EEA2/4-route? In other words, if someone would want to bring his/her future spouse (for example) to the UK at a later point, would taking up BC be a mistake?
You can choose if to apply based on own merit or as a spouse of a BC. Spouse of BC is better to apply under.Plum70 wrote:I am latching on to this thread as it is in a way similar to my case:
My husband is Swiss, holds confirmation of PR and will be applying for BC via NCS this Friday.
I, non-EEA, will be applying for PR confirmation (under EU law) in 2 weeks.
Once my husband naturalises and I obtain PR confirmation, when I am applying to naturalise as a BC, would I fall under the 3 year residency rule - for spouses married to a BC or the 5 year residency rule?
When showing proof of residency - whether 3 or 5 years, I imagine that the docs can either be solely mine - like my P60s - or joint docs like: our tenancy agreements, utility bills and so on?
Thanks Jambo.Jambo wrote:You can choose if to apply based on own merit or as a spouse of a BC. Spouse of BC is better to apply under.
For naturalisation, the supporting evidence required is minimal. For most cases only a passport is required. In your case you will also need to submit life in the UK test, marriage certificate and proof of partner British citizenship. That's all (no need for P60's etc).
Can't see how I can do the test anytime soon. We're travelling next week and then I submit my application for PR (on Oct. 15th) which would require my passport(s). Worst case scenario, my PR application takes 6 months so i'll have to wait till my docs are back to book and take the test. I understand that I have to book the test with my passport?Jambo wrote:The test material is about to change soon (it hasn't been updated since 2007). At the moment it is very easy to pass (a couple of hours with the book are enough). Might be worth doing it now. The pass result is valid forever.
I would put 2004. It seems that a lot of people find this question a tricky one but it doesn't really have any affect on the application even if you get it wrong.
I interpret this question as the first date of arrival in the UK with the intention to settle.Jambo wrote: I would put 2004. It seems that a lot of people find this question a tricky one but it doesn't really have any affect on the application even if you get it wrong.
You need to prove those years. However, proving residence for naturalisation is normally satisfied by providing the passport.anp wrote:About proving your residence....Since one is granted PR, like myself, I assume that there won't be a need to prove those 5 years again. Will I only need to prove the last year? (say Sept 12-Sept 13)
Surely, having a PR should, by itself, prove 5 years of residency. Are there any specific directions from HO regarding that? In principle, I imagine there shouldn't be a need to prove your residency if you have a PR.Jambo wrote:You need to prove those years. However, proving residence for naturalisation is normally satisfied by providing the passport.anp wrote:About proving your residence....Since one is granted PR, like myself, I assume that there won't be a need to prove those 5 years again. Will I only need to prove the last year? (say Sept 12-Sept 13)
See similar question - BC after 1 year of PR (EEA4).
Have you followed the link to my explanation on a similar question?anp wrote:Surely, having a PR should, by itself, prove 5 years of residency. Are there any specific directions from HO regarding that? In principle, I imagine there shouldn't be a need to prove your residency if you have a PR.
BC after 1 year of PR (EEA4) wrote:The residence requirements for PR are different from BC (PR allows upto six months absences per year. BC only 450 days in 5 years). You need to prove you meet the BC requirement.
Provide proof of what?anp wrote: But then again, when applying for naturalisation one must provide proof for all 6 years. AGAIN?